CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,356

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Perception of the Environment

Ingold, Tim·2002
DOI 10.4324/9780203466025
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this work Tim Ingold offers a persuasive approach to understanding how human beings perceive their surroundings. He argues that what we are used to calling cultural variation consists, in the first place, of variations in skill. Neither innate nor acquired, skills are grown, incorporated into the human organism through practice and training in an environment. They are thus as much biological as cultural. The twenty-three essays comprising this book focus in turn on the procurement of livelihood, on what it means to 'dwell', and on the nature of skill, weaving together approaches from social anthropology, ecological psychology, developmental biology and phenomenology in a way that has never been attempted before. The book is set to revolutionise the way we think about what is 'biological' and 'cultural' in humans, about evolution and history, and indeed about what it means for human beings - at once organisms and persons - to inhabit an environment. The Perception of the Environment will be essential reading not only for anthropologists but also for biologists, psychologists, archaeologists, geographers and philosophers.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9780203466025

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Ecological processes in reality do not follow a neat distinction between 'nature' and 'society'.

    “Since ecological processes in reality do not follow a neat distinction between ‘nature’ and ‘society’7,47,48, traditional movement models which ignore the complexities of human influence on animal behaviour for the sake of theoretical and algorithmic simplicity are growing increasingly unreliable49–51.”

    From Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [48]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ingold, T.
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2002-09-11
DOI
10.4324/9780203466025
Cited by
3,356
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review